Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                S. Gundavelli, Ed.
Request for Comments: 6909                                         Cisco
Category: Standards Track                                        X. Zhou
ISSN: 2070-1721                                          ZTE Corporation
                                                            J. Korhonen
                                                         Renesas Mobile
                                                               G. Feige
                                                              R. Koodli
                                                                  Cisco
                                                             April 2013


      IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option for Proxy Mobile IPv6

Abstract

  This specification defines a new mobility option, the IPv4 Traffic
  Offload Selector option, for Proxy Mobile IPv6.  This option can be
  used by the local mobility anchor and the mobile access gateway for
  negotiating IPv4 traffic offload policy for a mobility session.
  Based on the negotiated IPv4 traffic offload policy, a mobile access
  gateway can selectively offload some of the IPv4 traffic flows in the
  access network instead of tunneling back to the local mobility anchor
  in the home network.

Status of This Memo

  This is an Internet Standards Track document.

  This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
  (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
  received public review and has been approved for publication by the
  Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
  Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.

  Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
  and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
  http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6909.













Gundavelli, et al.           Standards Track                    [Page 1]

RFC 6909          IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option        April 2013


Copyright Notice

  Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
  document authors.  All rights reserved.

  This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
  Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
  (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
  publication of this document.  Please review these documents
  carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
  to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
  include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
  the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
  described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

  1. Introduction ....................................................2
  2. Conventions and Terminology .....................................4
     2.1. Conventions ................................................4
     2.2. Terminology ................................................4
  3. Solution Overview ...............................................4
     3.1. IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option .......................6
     3.2. MAG Considerations .........................................8
     3.3. LMA Considerations .........................................9
  4. Protocol Configuration Variables ...............................11
  5. IANA Considerations ............................................11
  6. Security Considerations ........................................12
  7. Acknowledgements ...............................................12
  8. References .....................................................13
     8.1. Normative References ......................................13
     8.2. Informative References ....................................13

1.  Introduction

  Mobile operators are expanding their network coverage by integrating
  various access technology domains (e.g., Wireless LAN, CDMA, and
  Long-Term Evolution (LTE)) into a common IP mobility core.  The Third
  Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) S2a Proxy Mobile IPv6 [TS23402]
  reference point, specified by the 3GPP system architecture, defines
  the protocol interworking for building such integrated multi-access
  networks.  In this scenario, the mobile node's IP traffic is always
  tunneled back from the mobile access gateway [RFC5213] in the access
  network to the local mobility anchor in the home network.  Currently,
  there is no mechanism for allowing some of the subscriber's IP flows
  to be offloaded in the access network.





Gundavelli, et al.           Standards Track                    [Page 2]

RFC 6909          IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option        April 2013


  With the exponential growth in mobile data traffic, mobile operators
  are exploring new ways to offload some of the IP traffic flows at the
  nearest access edge.  The offload is intended either for local
  service access in the access network or for Internet offload through
  the access network when there is an Internet peering point.  Not all
  IP traffic flows need to be routed back to the home network; the
  traffic that does not require IP mobility support can be offloaded at
  the mobile access gateway in the access network.  This approach
  allows efficient usage of the mobile packet core, which helps in
  lowering transport costs.  To identify the IP flows that need to be
  offloaded, the local mobility anchor in the home network can deliver
  the IP flow policy to the mobile access gateway in the access
  network.  It is up to an operator's discretion to classify the
  traffic for offload.  One operator might choose to offload everything
  except traffic (such as Voice over IP) that requires QoS services.
  Another might choose to offload only HTTP traffic.  This
  specification is only concerned with matching IP traffic against a
  given flow selector and classification of IP traffic for offloading
  purposes.  This approach has one limitation with respect to
  identifying encrypted traffic: IPsec-encrypted traffic with no
  visibility into the application payload cannot be selected for
  offload.

  This document defines a new mobility option, the IPv4 Traffic Offload
  Selector option (see Section 3.1), for Proxy Mobile IPv6 (PMIPv6).
  This option can be used by the local mobility anchor and the mobile
  access gateway for negotiating IPv4 traffic offload policy for a
  mobility session.  This IPv4 traffic offload policy identifies the
  flow selectors that can be used for selecting the flows that can be
  offloaded at the access edge.  Since the mobile node's IP address
  topologically belongs to the home network, the offloaded IPv4 traffic
  flows may need to be NAT [RFC2663] translated.  These offloaded flows
  will not have mobility support as the NAT becomes the anchor point
  for those flows.  However, when the traffic is offloaded for local
  service access as opposed to Internet offload, NAT translation may
  not be needed if the mobile access gateway is in the path for the
  return traffic.  The decision on when to apply NAT translation can be
  based on local configuration on the mobile access gateway.  There are
  better ways to address the offload problem for IPv6, and with the
  goal not to create a NAT66 requirement, this specification therefore
  does not address traffic offload support for IPv6 flows.










Gundavelli, et al.           Standards Track                    [Page 3]

RFC 6909          IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option        April 2013


2.  Conventions and Terminology

2.1.  Conventions

  The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
  "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
  document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

2.2.  Terminology

  All the mobility-related terms used in this document are to be
  interpreted as defined in the base Proxy Mobile IPv6 specifications
  [RFC5213] [RFC5844].  Additionally, this document uses the following
  terms:

  IP Flow

     IP flow [RFC5101] represents a set of IP packets that match a
     traffic selector (TS).  The selector is typically based on the
     source IP address, destination IP address, source port,
     destination port, and other fields in upper-layer headers.

  IP Traffic Offload

     IP traffic offload is the approach of selecting specific IP flows
     and routing them through the access network instead of tunneling
     them to the home network.  Offload can also be between two access
     networks (e.g., moving some of the traffic from LTE access to WLAN
     access).

3.  Solution Overview

  Figure 1 illustrates the scenario where the mobile access gateway in
  an access network has enabled IPv4 traffic offload support for a
  mobility session.  The offload decision is based on the IPv4 traffic
  offload policy that it negotiated with the local mobility anchor in
  the home network.  For example, all the HTTP flows may be offloaded
  at the mobile access gateway, and all the other flows for that
  mobility session are tunneled back to the local mobility anchor.  The
  offloaded flows typically have to be NAT translated, and this
  specification does not impose any restrictions on the location of the
  NAT function.  It is possible for the NAT function to be co-located
  with the mobile access gateway or located somewhere at the edge of
  the access network.  When the NAT function is not co-located with the
  mobile access gateway, offloaded traffic flows must be delivered
  through the local access network between the mobile access gateway
  and the NAT function, for example, through a VLAN or a point-to-point
  link.  The exact means for this delivery are outside the scope of



Gundavelli, et al.           Standards Track                    [Page 4]

RFC 6909          IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option        April 2013


  this document.  If the offloaded IPv4 flows are for local service
  access and reverse traffic from the local service device can be
  routed to the mobile node through the mobile access gateway, the
  offloaded flows may be delivered directly to a local service device.

  The traffic selectors in the IPv4 traffic offload policy are used to
  classify the traffic, so it can be offloaded at the access network.
  These parameters include source IP address, destination IP address,
  TCP/UDP port numbers, and other fields.  The format of the IPv4
  binary traffic selector is specified in Section 3.1 of [RFC6088].

                                     _----_
                                   _(      )_
                :-----------------( Internet )---------------:
                |                  (_      _)                |
                |                    '----'                  |
                |                                            |
                :                                            |
     (IPv4 Traffic Offload Point)                            |
                :                                            |
                |                                            |
     ........................................................|....
                |                              |             |
     +--------+ |                   +---------------------+  |
     |  Local | |                   | Services requiring  |  |
     |Services| |                   | mobility, or service|  |
     +--------+ |                   | treatment           |  |
          |     |                   +---------------------+  |
          |   +---+                            |             |
          |   |NAT|                            |             |
          |   +---+                            |             |
          +-----|            _----_            |             |
             +-----+       _(      )_       +-----+          |
     [MN]----| MAG |======(    IP    )======| LMA |----------
             +-----+       (_      _)       +-----+  Internet
                             '----'
                                .
                                .
         [Access Network]       .        [Home Network]
     ..........................................................

            Figure 1: IPv4 Traffic Offload Support at the MAG

  Figure 2 explains the operational sequence of the Proxy Mobile IPv6
  protocol signaling message exchange between the mobile access gateway
  (MAG) and the local mobility anchor (LMA) for negotiating the IPv4
  traffic offload selectors.  The details related to DHCP transactions
  or Router Advertisements on the access link are not shown here as



Gundavelli, et al.           Standards Track                    [Page 5]

RFC 6909          IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option        April 2013


  that is not the key focus of this specification.  The use of IPv4
  Traffic Selector option in the Proxy Binding Update is for allowing
  the MAG to request the LMA for the IPv4 traffic offload policy.

     MN    MAG(NAT)   LMA
     |------>|        |    1.  Mobile Node Attach
     |       |------->|    2.  Proxy Binding Update (IPv4TS)
     |       |<-------|    3.  Proxy Binding Acknowledgement (IPv4TS)
     |       |========|    4.  Tunnel/Route Setup
     |       +        |    5.  Installing the traffic offload rules
     |------>|        |    6.  IPv4 packet from mobile node
     |       +        |    7.  Offload rule applied (Tunnel/offload)
     |       |        |

          Figure 2: Exchange of IPv4 Traffic Offload Selectors

3.1.  IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option

  A new mobility option, the IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option (53),
  is defined for use in Proxy Binding Update (PBU) and Proxy Binding
  Acknowledgement (PBA) messages exchanged between a mobile access
  gateway and a local mobility anchor.  This option is used for
  carrying the IPv4 traffic offload policy.  This policy identifies the
  IPv4 traffic flow selectors that can be used by the mobile access
  gateway for enforcing the offload policy.

  The alignment requirement for this option is 4n.

  0                   1                   2                   3
  0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
                                  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                                  |      Type     |   Length      |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |M|                         Reserved                            |
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  |                  Traffic Selector Sub-option   ...
  +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

             Figure 3: IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option

  Type
     53

  Length
     8-bit unsigned integer indicating the length in octets of the
     option, excluding the type and length fields.





Gundavelli, et al.           Standards Track                    [Page 6]

RFC 6909          IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option        April 2013


  Offload Mode (M) Flag
     This field indicates the offload mode.

        If the (M) flag value is set to a value of (0), it is an
        indication that the IPv4 flow(s) that match the traffic
        selectors in the Traffic Selector sub-option [RFC6089] and that
        are associated to that mobility session have to be offloaded at
        the mobile access gateway.  All the other IPv4 flows associated
        with that mobility session and not matching the traffic
        selectors have to be tunneled to the local mobility anchor.

        If the (M) flag value is set to a value of (1), it is an
        indication that all the IPv4 flows associated to that mobility
        session except the IPv4 flow(s) matching the traffic selectors
        in the Traffic Selector sub-option have to be offloaded at the
        mobile access gateway.  All the IPv4 flows associated with that
        mobility session and matching the traffic selectors have to be
        tunneled back to the local mobility anchor.

  Reserved
     This field is unused for now.  The value MUST be initialized to 0
     by the sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver.

  Traffic Selector Sub-option
     The Traffic Selector sub-option includes the parameters used to
     match packets for a specific flow binding.  This is an optional
     sub-option when the IPv4 Traffic Selector option is carried in a
     Proxy Binding Update message but is a mandatory sub-option when
     the IPv4 Traffic Selector option is carried in a Proxy Binding
     Acknowledgement message.  The format of the Traffic Selector sub-
     option is defined in Section 4.2.1.4 of [RFC6089].  This sub-
     option includes a TS Format field, which identifies the format of
     the flow specification included in that sub-option.  The values
     for that field are defined in Section 3 of [RFC6088] and are
     repeated here for completeness.  When the value of the TS Format
     field is set to (1), the format that follows is the IPv4 binary
     traffic selector specified in Section 3.1 of [RFC6088], and that
     support is mandatory for this specification.  The text specified
     in this section takes precedence over what is specified in
     [RFC6088] and [RFC6089].

        1: IPv4 binary traffic selector

        2: IPv6 binary traffic selector (not used by this
        specification)






Gundavelli, et al.           Standards Track                    [Page 7]

RFC 6909          IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option        April 2013


3.2.  MAG Considerations

  o  If the mobile access gateway is configured to enable IPv4 traffic
     offload support, then it includes the IPv4 Traffic Offload
     Selector option (Section 3.1) in the Proxy Binding Update message
     that it sends to the local mobility anchor.  Optionally, the
     mobile access gateway can also propose a specific offload policy.

     *  The mobile access gateway MAY choose not to propose any
        specific IPv4 traffic offload policy but request the local
        mobility anchor for the offload policy.  In this scenario, the
        IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option that is carried in the
        Proxy Binding Update message does not include the Traffic
        Selector sub-option (see Section 3.1), and the (M) flag (see
        Section 3.1) in the option MUST be set to a value of (0).
        Including the IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option in the Proxy
        Binding Update without the Traffic Selector sub-option serves
        as an indication that the mobile access gateway is not
        proposing any specific offload policy for that mobility
        session, but rather it makes a request to the local mobility
        anchor to provide the offload policy.

     *  The mobile access gateway MAY choose to propose a specific IPv4
        traffic offload policy by including the Traffic Selector sub-
        option in the IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option (see
        Section 3.1).  The specific details on how the mobile access
        gateway obtains the mobile node's IPv4 traffic offload policy
        are outside the scope of this document.  When this offload
        policy is included in the Proxy Binding Update message, it
        serves as a proposal to the local mobility anchor.  The local
        mobility anchor can override with its own offload policy, or it
        can agree to the proposed policy.  The offload policy has to be
        translated to a set of selectors that can be used to match the
        mobile node's IP flows, and these selectors have to be carried
        in the Traffic Selector sub-option.  The Traffic Selector sub-
        option MUST be constructed as specified in Section 4.2.1.4 of
        [RFC6089].  This sub-option includes a TS Format field, which
        identifies the format of the flow specification included in the
        sub-option.  The values for that field and the corresponding
        message format are defined in Section 3.1 of [RFC6088].
        Considerations from Section 3.1 apply with respect to setting
        the Offload Mode (M) flag.

  o  When sending a Proxy Binding Update either for Binding Lifetime
     Extension or for Binding De-Registration, the mobile access
     gateway SHOULD copy the IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option from
     the initial Proxy Binding Update message.  Considerations from
     Sections 6.9.1.3 and 6.9.1.4 of [RFC5213] MUST be applied.



Gundavelli, et al.           Standards Track                    [Page 8]

RFC 6909          IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option        April 2013


  o  If the mobile access gateway is not configured to support IPv4
     traffic offload support as specified in this specification, but if
     the received Proxy Binding Acknowledgement message has the IPv4
     Traffic Offload Selector option, then the mobile access gateway
     MUST ignore the option and process the rest of the message as per
     [RFC5213].

  o  If there is no IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option in the Proxy
     Binding Acknowledgement message received from the local mobility
     anchor, it is an indication that the local mobility anchor did not
     enable IPv4 traffic offload support for that mobility session.
     Upon accepting the Proxy Binding Acknowledgement message, the
     mobile access gateway SHOULD NOT enable IPv4 traffic offload
     support for that mobility session.

  o  If there is an IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option in the Proxy
     Binding Acknowledgement message, then the mobile access gateway
     SHOULD enable IPv4 traffic offload support for that mobility
     session.  The mobility access gateway has to provision the data
     plane using the flow selectors present in the Traffic Selector
     sub-option.  The IPv4 flows matching the flow selectors have to be
     offloaded or tunneled back based to the local mobility anchor
     based on the value of the Offload Mode (M) flag (see Section 3.1).

3.3.  LMA Considerations

  o  If the received Proxy Binding Update message does not include the
     IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option (Section 3.1), then the local
     mobility anchor MUST NOT enable IPv4 traffic offload support for
     that mobility session, and the Proxy Binding Acknowledgement
     message that will be sent in response MUST NOT contain the IPv4
     Traffic Offload Selector option.

  o  If the Proxy Binding Update message includes the IPv4 Traffic
     Offload Selector option, but the local mobility anchor is not
     configured to support IPv4 traffic offload support, then the local
     mobility anchor will ignore the option and process the rest of the
     message as per [RFC5213].  This would have no effect on the
     operation of the rest of the protocol.

  o  If the Proxy Binding Update message has the IPv4 Traffic Offload
     Selector option and if the local mobility anchor is configured to
     support IPv4 traffic offload support, then the local mobility
     anchor MUST enable IPv4 traffic offload support for that mobility
     session.  The Proxy Binding Acknowledgement message that will be
     sent in response MUST include the IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector
     option.  The following considerations apply with respect to
     constructing the IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option.



Gundavelli, et al.           Standards Track                    [Page 9]

RFC 6909          IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option        April 2013


     *  The local mobility anchor can obtain the offload policy from
        the local configuration store or from a network function such
        as AAA (Authentication, Authorization, and Accounting) or PCRF
        (Policy and Charging Rule Function).  The offload policy has to
        be translated to a set of selectors that can be used to match
        the mobile node's IP flows, and these selectors have to be
        carried in the Traffic Selector sub-option.  The Traffic
        Selector sub-option MUST be constructed as specified in Section
        4.2.1.4 of [RFC6089].  Considerations from Section 3.1 apply
        with respect to the Offload Mode (M) flag setting.

     *  If the Proxy Binding Update message includes a specific IPv4
        traffic offload policy proposal in the form of the Traffic
        Selector sub-option [RFC6089], then the local mobility anchor
        MAY choose to agree to that request by including the same IPv4
        traffic offload policy in the Proxy Binding Acknowledgement
        message.  This implies the local mobility anchor has agreed to
        the IPv4 traffic offload policy provided by the mobile access
        gateway.  The local mobility anchor MAY also choose to override
        the request by including a different IPv4 traffic offload
        policy that it wants the mobile access gateway to enforce for
        that mobility session.  This is entirely based on the policy
        configuration on the local mobility anchor.

     *  The IPv4 traffic offload policy that is sent to the mobile
        access gateway has to be specific to the mobility session
        identified using the Mobile Node Identifier option [RFC5213].
        The offload policy MUST be specific to a mobile node's
        application traffic.  The traffic selectors have to match only
        the mobile node's application traffic and MUST NOT match any
        other mobile node's IP traffic.  Furthermore, control-plane
        traffic such as DHCP, Neighbor Discovery (ND), or any other IP
        traffic that is used for IP address configuration, mobility
        management, or other control-plane functions MUST NOT be
        subject to offload.

     *  The local mobility anchor MUST NOT make any changes to the
        mobile node's offload policy during the middle of a mobility
        session, as long as the mobile node continues to attach to the
        mobile access gateway that negotiated the offload policy.
        However, when the mobile node performs an inter-MAG handover,
        the new mobile access gateway may not be capable of supporting
        IP Traffic offload and in this scenario, the offload policy may
        change.  Therefore, the IPv4 Traffic Selector option with the
        Traffic Selector sub-option that is delivered during the
        initial mobility signaling MUST be the same as the one that is
        delivered as part of the mobility signaling related to lifetime
        extension from the same mobile access gateway.



Gundavelli, et al.           Standards Track                   [Page 10]

RFC 6909          IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option        April 2013


4.  Protocol Configuration Variables

  This specification defines the following configuration variable that
  controls the IPv4 traffic offload support feature.  This
  configuration variable is internal to the system and has no bearing
  on interoperability across different implementations.

  The mobility entities, local mobility anchor, and the mobile access
  gateway have to allow these variables to be configured by the system
  management.  The configured values for these protocol variables have
  to survive server reboots and service restarts.

  EnableIPv4TrafficOffloadSupport

        This flag indicates whether or not IPv4 traffic offload support
        needs to be enabled.  This configuration variable is available
        at both the mobile access gateway and the local mobility
        anchor.  The default value for this flag is set to (0),
        indicating that IPv4 traffic offload support is disabled.

        When this flag on the mobile access gateway is set to a value
        of (1), the mobile access gateway has to enable IPv4 traffic
        offload support for all mobility sessions, by specifically
        requesting the IPv4 traffic offload policy from the local
        mobility anchor by including the IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector
        option in the Proxy Binding Update message.  If the flag is set
        to a value of (0), the mobile access gateway has to disable
        IPv4 traffic offload support for all mobility sessions.

        Similarly, when this flag on the local mobility anchor is set
        to a value of (1), the local mobility anchor has to enable IPv4
        traffic offload support.  If the local mobility anchor chooses
        to enable IPv4 traffic offload support when there is an offload
        policy specified for a mobile node, it has to deliver the IPv4
        traffic offload policy to the mobile access gateway by
        including the IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option in the Proxy
        Binding Acknowledgement message.

5.  IANA Considerations

  Per this specification, IANA has assigned a new mobility option: the
  IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option (53).  This option is described
  in Section 3.1.  The Type value for this option has been assigned
  from the same numbering space as allocated for the other mobility
  options [RFC6275].






Gundavelli, et al.           Standards Track                   [Page 11]

RFC 6909          IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option        April 2013


6.  Security Considerations

  The IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector option defined in this
  specification is for use in Proxy Binding Update and Proxy Binding
  Acknowledgement messages.  This option is carried like any other
  mobility header option as specified in [RFC5213].  Therefore, it
  inherits from [RFC5213] its security guidelines and does not require
  any additional security considerations.  Carrying IPv4 traffic
  offload selectors does not introduce any new security
  vulnerabilities.

  When IPv4 traffic offload support is enabled for a mobile node, the
  mobile access gateway selectively offloads some of the mobile node's
  IPv4 traffic flows to the access network.  Typically, these offloaded
  flows get NAT translated, which essentially introduces certain
  vulnerabilities that are common to any NAT deployment.  These
  vulnerabilities and the related considerations have been well
  documented in the NAT specification [RFC2663].  There are no
  additional considerations above and beyond what has already been
  documented by the NAT specifications and that are unique to the
  approach specified in this document.

  The mobile node's home network may be equipped with firewall and
  other security devices to guard against any security threats.  When
  IPv4 traffic offload support is enabled, it potentially exposes the
  mobile node to some security risks in the access network.  This
  threat can be mitigated by deploying the security features both in
  the access network and in the home network.

  When IPv4 traffic offload support is enabled for a mobile node, some
  of the IP flows are sent through the home network, and some other IP
  flows are routed through the access network.  This potentially
  introduces some complexity with respect to enabling diagnostics or
  monitoring on the user traffic.  The tools that are used for such
  diagnostics have to be aware of the offload policy that in enabled in
  the network.

7.  Acknowledgements

  The authors would like to thank Ahmad Muhanna, Basavaraj Patil,
  Carlos Bernardos, Eric Voit, Frank Brockners, Hidetoshi Yokota, Marco
  Liebsch, Mark Grayson, Pierrick Seite, Ryuji Wakikawa, Steve Wood,
  Barry Leiba, Sean Turner, Pete Resnick, Wesley Eddy, Mary Barnes,
  Vincent Roca, Ralph Droms, Scott Bradner, Stephen Farrell, Adrian
  Farrel, Benoit Claise, and Brian Haberman for all the reviews and
  discussions related to the topic of IPv4 traffic offload.





Gundavelli, et al.           Standards Track                   [Page 12]

RFC 6909          IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option        April 2013


8.  References

8.1.  Normative References

  [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

  [RFC5213]  Gundavelli, S., Leung, K., Devarapalli, V., Chowdhury, K.,
             and B. Patil, "Proxy Mobile IPv6", RFC 5213, August 2008.

  [RFC5844]  Wakikawa, R. and S. Gundavelli, "IPv4 Support for Proxy
             Mobile IPv6", RFC 5844, May 2010.

  [RFC6088]  Tsirtsis, G., Giarreta, G., Soliman, H., and N. Montavont,
             "Traffic Selectors for Flow Bindings", RFC 6088,
             January 2011.

  [RFC6089]  Tsirtsis, G., Soliman, H., Montavont, N., Giaretta, G.,
             and K. Kuladinithi, "Flow Bindings in Mobile IPv6 and
             Network Mobility (NEMO) Basic Support", RFC 6089,
             January 2011.

  [RFC6275]  Perkins, C., Johnson, D., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support
             in IPv6", RFC 6275, July 2011.

8.2.  Informative References

  [RFC2663]  Srisuresh, P. and M. Holdrege, "IP Network Address
             Translator (NAT) Terminology and Considerations",
             RFC 2663, August 1999.

  [RFC5101]  Claise, B., "Specification of the IP Flow Information
             Export (IPFIX) Protocol for the Exchange of IP Traffic
             Flow Information", RFC 5101, January 2008.

  [TS23402]  3GPP, "Architecture enhancements for non-3GPP accesses",
             2010.














Gundavelli, et al.           Standards Track                   [Page 13]

RFC 6909          IPv4 Traffic Offload Selector Option        April 2013


Authors' Addresses

  Sri Gundavelli (editor)
  Cisco
  170 West Tasman Drive
  San Jose, CA  95134
  USA

  EMail: [email protected]


  Xingyue Zhou
  ZTE Corporation
  No.68 Zijinghua Rd
  Nanjing
  China

  EMail: [email protected]


  Jouni Korhonen
  Renesas Mobile
  Porkkalankatu 24
  Helsinki  FIN-00180
  Finland

  EMail: [email protected]


  Gaetan Feige
  Cisco
  France

  EMail: [email protected]


  Rajeev Koodli
  Cisco
  3650 Cisco Way
  San Jose, CA  95134
  USA

  EMail: [email protected]








Gundavelli, et al.           Standards Track                   [Page 14]


You are viewing proxied material from gopher.fnord.one. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.